The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Sotomayor is like some kind of sick joke, derailing SCOTUS
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| internet-worthy idiotic center hominid | 01/15/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| dashing salmon dilemma hissy fit | 01/16/13 |
| Dun Legal Warrant Menage | 12/09/15 |
| comical son of senegal shrine | 01/15/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| comical son of senegal shrine | 01/15/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| comical son of senegal shrine | 01/15/13 |
| Effete massive digit ratio | 01/15/13 |
| Chest-beating bateful address | 01/15/13 |
| cracking overrated church | 01/16/13 |
| Saffron aromatic deer antler regret | 03/26/13 |
| Sticky drab international law enforcement agency | 03/18/13 |
| Racy Useless Theater French Chef | 03/18/13 |
| Saffron aromatic deer antler regret | 03/26/13 |
| comical son of senegal shrine | 03/26/13 |
| Saffron aromatic deer antler regret | 03/26/13 |
| comical son of senegal shrine | 03/26/13 |
| Saffron aromatic deer antler regret | 03/26/13 |
| slap-happy rebellious sanctuary | 03/26/13 |
| Saffron aromatic deer antler regret | 03/26/13 |
| slap-happy rebellious sanctuary | 03/26/13 |
| vibrant elastic band whorehouse | 06/05/18 |
| vibrant elastic band whorehouse | 06/05/18 |
| Wild unholy tanning salon codepig | 04/07/16 |
| big striped hyena rigpig | 03/26/13 |
| Light location doctorate | 03/26/13 |
| comical son of senegal shrine | 03/26/13 |
| Light location doctorate | 03/26/13 |
| Saffron aromatic deer antler regret | 03/26/13 |
| Saffron aromatic deer antler regret | 03/26/13 |
| slap-happy rebellious sanctuary | 03/27/13 |
| Floppy house candlestick maker | 06/05/18 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 01/15/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| Sticky drab international law enforcement agency | 03/18/13 |
| Razzle-dazzle onyx persian | 03/18/13 |
| lemon giraffe plaza | 03/26/13 |
| talking range | 03/26/13 |
| soul-stirring ratface | 03/26/13 |
| shaky gunner quadroon | 05/07/13 |
| Charismatic turdskin | 04/17/17 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 01/15/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 01/15/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 01/16/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/16/13 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 01/16/13 |
| talking range | 03/26/13 |
| Seedy hairless university mother | 06/14/15 |
| Erotic Ultramarine Hall | 12/09/15 |
| histrionic gas station | 03/02/16 |
| Charismatic turdskin | 04/17/17 |
| Exhilarant brethren | 12/20/17 |
| Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit | 10/04/23 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 03/26/13 |
| talking range | 03/26/13 |
| soul-stirring ratface | 03/26/13 |
| Transparent flickering site half-breed | 04/23/13 |
| shaky gunner quadroon | 05/07/13 |
| Disrespectful carmine milk parlour | 11/04/13 |
| misanthropic obsidian water buffalo | 02/04/14 |
| blue temple | 03/02/16 |
| Trip Volcanic Crater Heaven | 11/13/16 |
| Embarrassed to the bone frisky potus | 01/31/17 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 03/26/13 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/17/17 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 03/26/13 |
| shaky gunner quadroon | 05/07/13 |
| Sticky drab international law enforcement agency | 05/07/13 |
| contagious kitchen | 10/15/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 04/23/13 |
| Charismatic turdskin | 04/17/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/17/17 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 04/23/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 10/08/13 |
| Appetizing Trailer Park | 02/04/14 |
| Spectacular market sex offender | 04/17/17 |
| Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit | 10/04/23 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 10/08/13 |
| exciting abusive cruise ship | 01/31/17 |
| Charismatic turdskin | 04/17/17 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 11/04/13 |
| sinister stag film headpube | 06/14/15 |
| Charismatic turdskin | 04/17/17 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 12/03/13 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 03/21/17 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 05/19/23 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 05/24/23 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 03/02/15 |
| blue temple | 03/02/16 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 03/21/17 |
| Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit | 10/04/23 |
| Domesticated Area | 01/15/13 |
| Translucent Thirsty Tank Shitlib | 01/15/13 |
| Diverse Field New Version | 01/15/13 |
| nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead | 01/15/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead | 01/15/13 |
| internet-worthy idiotic center hominid | 01/15/13 |
| Effete massive digit ratio | 01/15/13 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 01/16/13 |
| excitant topaz dysfunction | 03/18/13 |
| marvelous national | 03/26/13 |
| electric haunting circlehead | 05/07/13 |
| beady-eyed unhinged cuckold den | 03/26/13 |
| beady-eyed unhinged cuckold den | 01/31/17 |
| mind-boggling electric furnace | 01/15/13 |
| Chest-beating bateful address | 01/15/13 |
| Laughsome preventive strike | 04/23/13 |
| Floppy house candlestick maker | 06/05/18 |
| swashbuckling wrinkle | 01/15/13 |
| blue temple | 03/02/16 |
| Titillating resort | 01/15/13 |
| comical son of senegal shrine | 01/15/13 |
| Rambunctious nursing home | 01/16/13 |
| Stirring Hateful Home | 04/23/13 |
| violent self-absorbed nibblets | 10/23/13 |
| Crusty arrogant locus goyim | 10/31/16 |
| concupiscible stain indian lodge | 12/20/17 |
| arousing philosopher-king | 01/15/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| arousing philosopher-king | 01/16/13 |
| Turquoise slippery pistol space | 01/15/13 |
| nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead | 01/15/13 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 01/15/13 |
| aquamarine vivacious old irish cottage | 11/13/16 |
| well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug | 01/16/13 |
| Effete massive digit ratio | 01/16/13 |
| vigorous chrome stage idea he suggested | 02/16/13 |
| Thriller church building cuck | 05/21/13 |
| nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead | 03/26/13 |
| coral aphrodisiac mental disorder messiness | 03/26/13 |
| Racy Useless Theater French Chef | 04/23/13 |
| slimy boyish box office place of business | 10/15/13 |
| Floppy house candlestick maker | 06/05/18 |
| arousing philosopher-king | 06/14/15 |
| arousing philosopher-king | 06/26/15 |
| self-centered cocky associate library | 12/20/17 |
| Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit | 10/04/23 |
| sexy chapel | 01/15/13 |
| pink hyperactive school cafeteria fortuitous meteor | 01/16/13 |
| Seedy hairless university mother | 05/23/23 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 02/16/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 03/18/13 |
| bistre mediation | 03/26/13 |
| soul-stirring ratface | 03/26/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 03/26/13 |
| Razzle-dazzle onyx persian | 03/27/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 03/27/13 |
| red multi-billionaire public bath | 04/23/13 |
| Transparent flickering site half-breed | 04/24/13 |
| slap-happy rebellious sanctuary | 05/07/13 |
| vigorous chrome stage idea he suggested | 06/14/15 |
| Sick internal respiration station | 04/24/13 |
| judgmental lodge boistinker | 04/24/13 |
| ebony really tough guy | 12/09/15 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 03/21/18 |
| judgmental lodge boistinker | 04/24/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 04/24/13 |
| judgmental lodge boistinker | 04/24/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 04/24/13 |
| Sticky drab international law enforcement agency | 05/07/13 |
| lemon giraffe plaza | 11/13/16 |
| Razzle-dazzle onyx persian | 05/07/13 |
| shaky gunner quadroon | 05/07/13 |
| Appetizing Trailer Park | 02/04/14 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 05/07/13 |
| buff faggot firefighter parlor | 05/21/13 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 10/15/13 |
| Awkward mahogany native | 10/15/13 |
| gay autistic black woman property | 10/15/13 |
| Irate supple rehab macaca | 10/23/13 |
| Odious mexican windowlicker | 11/04/13 |
| vibrant elastic band whorehouse | 06/05/18 |
| gay autistic black woman property | 10/23/13 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 02/04/14 |
| twinkling gaming laptop | 02/04/14 |
| lemon giraffe plaza | 04/07/16 |
| Floppy house candlestick maker | 06/05/18 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 03/10/14 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 04/22/14 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 10/26/14 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 01/25/15 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 06/14/15 |
| violent self-absorbed nibblets | 06/14/15 |
| arousing philosopher-king | 06/26/15 |
| well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug | 11/02/15 |
| violent self-absorbed nibblets | 11/02/15 |
| histrionic gas station | 11/02/15 |
| Mewling cerebral office police squad | 11/02/15 |
| Talented frozen brunch friendly grandma | 12/09/15 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 12/09/15 |
| Erotic Ultramarine Hall | 12/09/15 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 12/10/15 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 07/11/18 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 01/20/16 |
| Grizzly voyeur halford | 02/16/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 03/02/16 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 03/02/16 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 03/02/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 03/02/16 |
| ebony really tough guy | 04/13/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 03/02/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 03/05/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 03/21/16 |
| ebony really tough guy | 06/28/18 |
| pink hyperactive school cafeteria fortuitous meteor | 03/21/16 |
| heady hot crackhouse | 03/23/16 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/05/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 04/07/16 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 04/13/16 |
| Charismatic turdskin | 04/17/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 04/18/16 |
| nofapping lay nowag | 04/18/16 |
| lascivious gaping national security agency | 04/18/16 |
| aquamarine vivacious old irish cottage | 04/22/16 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 06/20/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 06/20/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 10/04/16 |
| irradiated mood set | 10/04/16 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 10/04/16 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 07/11/18 |
| Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit | 10/04/23 |
| exciting abusive cruise ship | 10/04/16 |
| Galvanic casino marketing idea | 12/06/17 |
| Frum Dead Fanboi | 10/18/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 10/24/16 |
| chartreuse cowardly organic girlfriend | 10/24/16 |
| violent self-absorbed nibblets | 10/24/16 |
| Trip Volcanic Crater Heaven | 11/13/16 |
| Talented frozen brunch friendly grandma | 11/18/16 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 03/21/17 |
| dashing salmon dilemma hissy fit | 04/17/17 |
| slate sweet tailpipe meetinghouse | 10/31/16 |
| ebony really tough guy | 10/31/16 |
| Crusty arrogant locus goyim | 10/31/16 |
| slate sweet tailpipe meetinghouse | 10/31/16 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 10/31/16 |
| deep corner ceo | 04/27/17 |
| outnumbered incel | 06/05/18 |
| slate sweet tailpipe meetinghouse | 10/31/16 |
| Crusty arrogant locus goyim | 11/12/16 |
| Anal senate karate | 11/12/16 |
| glittery pocket flask | 11/13/16 |
| Greedy locale fat ankles | 11/14/16 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 01/18/17 |
| Razzmatazz lime becky | 01/31/17 |
| fuchsia adventurous pit coldplay fan | 01/31/17 |
| Razzmatazz lime becky | 01/31/17 |
| fuchsia adventurous pit coldplay fan | 01/31/17 |
| Razzmatazz lime becky | 01/31/17 |
| exciting abusive cruise ship | 01/31/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 02/16/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 02/28/17 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 02/28/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 03/21/17 |
| ebony really tough guy | 02/28/17 |
| bull headed school | 03/21/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 03/21/17 |
| yellow step-uncle's house | 04/04/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/04/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 04/17/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/17/17 |
| insecure rusted forum partner | 04/17/17 |
| Fear-inspiring fragrant base | 04/17/17 |
| Anal senate karate | 04/17/17 |
| Fear-inspiring fragrant base | 04/17/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/17/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/17/17 |
| Charismatic turdskin | 04/17/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/17/17 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 04/17/17 |
| bull headed school | 04/17/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/17/17 |
| Amethyst passionate double fault stage | 04/27/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 04/28/17 |
| well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug | 05/22/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 05/22/17 |
| lemon giraffe plaza | 05/22/17 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 05/22/17 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 06/20/17 |
| Dark curious point newt | 11/02/22 |
| well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug | 06/05/17 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 06/05/17 |
| lemon giraffe plaza | 06/05/17 |
| rough-skinned hell generalized bond | 06/20/17 |
| olive razzle dopamine principal's office | 06/26/17 |
| self-centered cocky associate library | 09/27/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 10/03/17 |
| pea-brained depressive | 10/03/17 |
| hairraiser state jew | 10/03/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 10/03/17 |
| Opaque stimulating affirmative action | 10/04/17 |
| 180 spruce theater stage indirect expression | 10/05/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 10/05/17 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 10/05/17 |
| Galvanic casino marketing idea | 12/06/17 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 12/20/17 |
| self-centered cocky associate library | 02/27/18 |
| pungent business firm trust fund | 12/20/17 |
| Azure misunderstood party of the first part | 12/20/17 |
| exciting abusive cruise ship | 12/20/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 12/20/17 |
| pungent business firm trust fund | 12/20/17 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 12/20/17 |
| pungent business firm trust fund | 12/20/17 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 07/11/18 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 01/08/18 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 06/05/18 |
| Violent territorial hospital | 01/17/18 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 01/17/18 |
| Violent territorial hospital | 01/18/18 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 02/26/18 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 02/26/18 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 02/27/18 |
| lemon giraffe plaza | 03/21/18 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 02/27/18 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 06/05/18 |
| lemon giraffe plaza | 03/28/18 |
| exciting abusive cruise ship | 05/02/18 |
| Garrison | 06/05/18 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 06/26/18 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 06/27/18 |
| Soggy drunken ticket booth faggotry | 08/05/18 |
| Seedy hairless university mother | 08/05/18 |
| gay autistic black woman property | 09/17/18 |
| flesh theatre | 03/28/19 |
| mildly autistic bawdyhouse round eye | 03/28/19 |
| lilac ape | 09/17/18 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 10/01/18 |
| Piazza Hairy Legs | 10/01/18 |
| vengeful wonderful prole sandwich | 10/09/18 |
| Avocado disturbing crotch | 10/09/18 |
| elite gaped abode | 03/28/19 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 03/28/19 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 04/15/19 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 02/23/20 |
| Galvanic casino marketing idea | 03/11/20 |
| Geriatric painfully honest main people | 03/11/20 |
| Selfie | 09/26/20 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 11/26/20 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 01/07/22 |
| blue temple | 01/08/22 |
| Buck-toothed jap ladyboy | 01/17/22 |
| well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug | 10/04/22 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 10/31/22 |
| Mustard hyperventilating | 11/01/22 |
| Henna cruel-hearted pisswyrm | 11/01/22 |
| Shimmering apoplectic patrolman | 11/01/22 |
| lettuce | 11/02/22 |
| Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit | 05/19/23 |
| Seedy hairless university mother | 05/23/23 |
| provocative haunted graveyard institution | 10/04/23 |
| alcoholic motley stock car | 02/08/24 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:48 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house seems like every argument gets derailed in the first couple minutes by Sotomayor asking these annoying "tough" questions which are all nakedly political in a way that isn't true for the other judges except maybe Scalia
edit: I regret this thread. posted it during a shitty edgy conservative phase in school. she is far from the worst justice. |
 |
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:50 PM Author: internet-worthy idiotic center hominid how do her clerks fail to prep her so badly (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440053) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:54 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440077) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 4:46 PM Author: dashing salmon dilemma hissy fit This (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22445482) |
|
Date: December 9th, 2015 7:33 PM Author: Dun Legal Warrant Menage she picks her clerks based on "diversity" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29345235) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:50 PM Author: comical son of senegal shrine link to examples? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440054) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:56 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440084) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:02 PM Author: comical son of senegal shrine I remember that. Scalia did a nice job of getting her to STFU (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440106) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:02 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440108) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:05 PM Author: comical son of senegal shrine if she's dumb, how did she end up salutatorian at princeton? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440118) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:07 PM Author: Effete massive digit ratio edit: apparently yale doesnt have honors |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:25 PM Author: Chest-beating bateful address her A+ in "latino race theory" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440228) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 4:51 PM Author: cracking overrated church *Calls Latina an AA recipient*
*Is reminded that she graduated salutatorian in undergrad*
*Blank Stare* |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:37 PM Author: Saffron aromatic deer antler regret see links below. she was AA to get in and AA to get the prize. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883415) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2013 3:20 PM Author: Sticky drab international law enforcement agency I know you gave this response to make Sotomayor appear more competent than she really is, but all it does is make Princeton look like a TTT in decline. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22839295) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2013 3:47 PM Author: Racy Useless Theater French Chef LOL @ xo racists. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22839446) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:29 PM Author: Saffron aromatic deer antler regret she was most definitely NOT the salutatorian there. there were two awards given out for "top" students in achievements but they were not based on grades. sotomayor herself said she struggled the first two years.
the awards were given to an insanely brilliant guy and the puerto rican trailblazer for her various accomplishments. but it wasn't grades. |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:51 PM Author: comical son of senegal shrine she got straight A's her last two years of college. That's impressive, given that the average GPA at the time was 3.10 or so. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883456) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:30 PM Author: Saffron aromatic deer antler regret "almost" all As. by that time she was in the upper level courses in her identity politics major. to respond to the poaster i was responding to, she was not the salutatorian of princeton.
everyone says she's not nearly as smart as she thinks. Tribe said it. the lawyers who appeared before her said it. listen to any oral argument and you will draw the same conclusion. she's of ordinary intelligence, tremendous drive to self-promote, a bit of a bully, and was the right gender and ethnicity for the current climate. |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:55 PM Author: comical son of senegal shrine citation for "identity politics" major? Wiki says history. Also, she graduated summa cum laude. Citation that that's not based on grades at princeton?
I don't care if she's "as smart as she thinks." She's smart. |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:04 PM Author: Saffron aromatic deer antler regret it was history, and she took identity politics courses in her major. he senior thesis was "The Impact of the Life of Luis Munoz Marin on the Political and Economic History of Puerto Rico, 1930-1975."
she was a latina activist there: http://images.politico.com/global/news/090528_sotomayorarticle.jpg
http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pictures/s-z/sotomayor_sonia/Sotomayor-thesis.pdf
it was identity politics through and through.
|
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:06 PM Author: slap-happy rebellious sanctuary She looks pretty good cot damn. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883839) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:07 PM Author: Saffron aromatic deer antler regret does she look cheerful to you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883846) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:13 PM Author: slap-happy rebellious sanctuary lolno, but you can literally see her nips. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883878) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:43 AM Author: vibrant elastic band whorehouse Update:
http://i.imgur.com/V3ST1.jpg |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:42 AM Author: vibrant elastic band whorehouse (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186492) |
|
Date: April 7th, 2016 11:11 AM Author: Wild unholy tanning salon codepig tbf, Munoz Marin is interesting as fuck. A real deal case story on how to corrupt a rebel and make them a tool of your bidding. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30220131) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:11 PM Author: big striped hyena rigpig She admits her scores weren't comparable to her classmates. She's reddit intellectual smart, not scotus justice smart. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883862) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:46 PM Author: Light location doctorate *gets mostly A's in two years of latino studies* *is one of the two smartest people at princeton in her year* |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:53 PM Author: comical son of senegal shrine She majored in history, and princeton didn't even have latino studies back then. pwn pwn pwn (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883777) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:56 PM Author: Light location doctorate *gets mostly A's in two years of history (a feat clearly beyond the median autoadmit poster)*
*is one of the two smartest people at princeton in her year* |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:34 PM Author: Saffron aromatic deer antler regret not the salutatorian.
http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pictures/s-z/sotomayor_sonia/Bowen_remarks.pdf |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:34 PM Author: Saffron aromatic deer antler regret compare this press release's description of sotomayor and the other winner of the Pyne.
http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pictures/s-z/sotomayor_sonia/Pyne_Prize_pr76.pdf |
|
Date: March 27th, 2013 12:49 PM Author: slap-happy rebellious sanctuary http://www.wellscap.com/people/david_germany.html
This is the other winner. |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:53 AM Author: Floppy house candlestick maker writing class profs give affirmative action to dark skinned students..I saw it in law school... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186563) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:29 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor MR. JOHNSON: Even if you say it does, it still doesn't -- it's not an element of the crime. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Could you simplify that? Could you simplify that? http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-9540.pdf |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:30 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440263) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2013 3:19 PM Author: Sticky drab international law enforcement agency A+ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22839292) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2013 3:44 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle onyx persian (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22839424) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:32 PM Author: lemon giraffe plaza Please let Wise Latina transcript quotations become part of a shtick. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883392) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:32 PM Author: talking range 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883676) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:56 PM Author: soul-stirring ratface 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883789) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 2:49 PM Author: shaky gunner quadroon God bless you mr johnson. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23151386) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:14 PM Author: Charismatic turdskin (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097584) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:30 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor MR. JOHNSON: Yes. In California you -just entry with intent is all you need, with intent to commit. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: But the unlawfulness is not necessary. MR. JOHNSON: It's not necessary and that's the point-- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: No matter what he said, he wasn't convicted of a generic crime because all he was convicted of under California law was entering and - MR. JOHNSON: Exactly. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: -- with intent. That's your point. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-9540.pdf |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:32 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor What the IAA says is that the government can sue when the violation occurs. Now - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Mr. Liman, I understand your argument, but I have a fundamental difficulty, okay? http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-1274.pdf |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 2:12 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor MR. MICHEL: It does. I will tell you, the reason why it does, it's in the doctrine of collateral estoppel. It affects the inventor. It's affecting the inventor in this case. This holding of the State district court and the State court of appeals are now before the Patent Office. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm sorry. How does it -- the patent's invalid. MR. MICHEL: I'm sorry? JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: The patent's invalid. Nothing the Court does here is going to change that invalidity. That's what I don't understand. MR. MICHEL: Correct. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: He's not going to get his patent back from this action. MR. MICHEL: That's correct. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: He's going to get money for losing it, maybe. MR. MICHEL: Correct. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So how does it affect the patent? MR. MICHEL: There is a pending continuation patent. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: We're back to that issue, okay. |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 2:15 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house jfc (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22444600) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 2:19 PM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich on what a wise MPEP scholar (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22444630) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:33 PM Author: talking range LOL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883682) |
|
Date: June 14th, 2015 1:04 PM Author: Seedy hairless university mother ty to whoever bumped this thread (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28116252) |
|
Date: December 9th, 2015 7:27 PM Author: Erotic Ultramarine Hall ouch (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29345190) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 6:15 PM Author: histrionic gas station (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29963646) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:15 PM Author: Charismatic turdskin (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097593) |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:13 PM Author: Exhilarant brethren (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968123) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2023 11:54 AM Author: Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit gosh (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46883179) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:14 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor JUSTICE KAGAN: A couple where both people are over the age of 55. MR. COOPER: And Your Honor, again, the marital norm which imposes upon that couple the obligation of fidelity - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm sorry, where is this - CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: I'm sorry, maybe you can finish your answer to Justice Kagan. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm sorry. MR. COOPER: It's designed, Your Honor, to make it less likely that either party to that -- to that marriage will engage in irresponsible procreative conduct outside of that marriage. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-144.pdf |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:33 PM Author: talking range (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883686) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:57 PM Author: soul-stirring ratface holy shit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883790) |
|
Date: April 23rd, 2013 11:57 PM Author: Transparent flickering site half-breed JFC (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064421) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 2:52 PM Author: shaky gunner quadroon yes! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23151398) |
|
Date: November 4th, 2013 1:45 PM Author: Disrespectful carmine milk parlour Ho Lee Fuk (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24367971) |
|
Date: February 4th, 2014 12:03 PM Author: misanthropic obsidian water buffalo (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24954959) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 9:04 PM Author: blue temple 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29965048) |
|
Date: November 13th, 2016 12:41 PM Author: Trip Volcanic Crater Heaven Disgusting manterrupting (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31897188) |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:30 PM Author: Embarrassed to the bone frisky potus (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32511136) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:01 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor MR. WAXMAN: Well, Justice Ginsburg, two things. First of all, if you look at page 10 -- or page 14, footnote 7 of our yellow brief, you'll see all of the references made in the advocacy before the State court judge by my -- my brother here, not recognizing repeatedly that what Oxford was asking for was a dismissal and a transfer to individual arbitration - bilateral arbitration. There was no mistake whatsoever in the New Jersey State courts that Oxford's position was that - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Mr. Waxman - CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Finish your answer. MR. WAXMAN: Yes -- that bilateral arbitration was what was requested, and -- but there was similarly no dispute that both parties -- certainly Oxford took the position based on an understanding of New Jersey law at the time, because this Court hadn't decided class action question, that the decision would be submitted in the first instance to the arbitrator as it was in Stolt-Nielsen. Yes, Justice Sotomayor. I apologize. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: That's my question. Did you never -- you never argued that it was beyond the power of the arbitrator to decide this question, did you? http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-135.pdf |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:20 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097630) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:02 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: How do we draw the line, that line that you just asked us to draw between direct and indirect? How do we articulate that line? MR. SHAUGHNESSY: The direct - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Because now you're - now you're articulating a different line. You are saying this -- the hypothetical that Justice Kagan posited is not storage-related, it is something else-related. It's towing-related. What's the difference? http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-52.pdf |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 2:53 PM Author: shaky gunner quadroon 180
the hypothetical that Justice Kagan posited is not storage-related, it is something else-related. It's towing-related. What's the difference?
This is doobsian. |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 3:01 PM Author: Sticky drab international law enforcement agency BUT BUT BUT where do we draw the line???
|
|
Date: October 15th, 2013 8:00 PM Author: contagious kitchen tbf, pretty sure alito asks that question the most (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24240591) |
|
Date: April 23rd, 2013 11:32 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor MR. CLEMENT: Well, a couple of things, Justice Sotomayor. I went back to the Tropiano case, because it is sort of the progenitor of this whole line of Second Circuit cases, and I noticed two things. One, I noticed it was written by a district court sitting by designation. So, I mean, I -- I don't mean anything by that other than this is not Marbury. Second, I would say that the second thing I noticed is that the debt - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Oh, I think when I sat as a district court judge, I would have been insulted by that. MR. CLEMENT: Well, it's not -- it's a good thing you're no longer sitting in that capacity, Your Honor - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Okay. It's really - MR. CLEMENT: -- because I -- I certainly mean you no offense. You could write Marbury here. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-357.pdf |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:19 PM Author: Charismatic turdskin underrated (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097621) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:21 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097643) |
|
Date: April 23rd, 2013 11:33 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor MS. HARRINGTON: That he was trying to get commitment; that was one of the choices. What they circled was the recommendation. Now, who knows why a jury does anything. I assume, like I said, it's because that was what the e-mails were about, they were about the recommendation. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I didn't think they circled recommendation. They circled his honest advice, didn't they? MS. HARRINGTON: No, they circled -- it says the General Counsel's recommendation -- this is on the JA 142. That's where it - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm sorry. MS. HARRINGTON: JA 142. What they circled was the General Counsel's recommendation to approve the commitment. And I think that wording is very helpful to us, because it's not just that he's trying to obtain a recommendation from the General Counsel. He's trying to obtain a particular recommendation, the recommendation to approve the commitment. I think that encapsulates both the property and the obtaining that is the theory of our case. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-357.pdf |
|
Date: October 8th, 2013 2:10 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor JUSTICE ALITO: Those were all created by the dairy industry or by the Nixon campaign, is that correct? MR. BURCHFIELD: That's not -- as I understand -- as I read the lower court decision in Buckley, that is correct. In addition, you also have -- you also have a thick volume - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Then how is it that - MR. BURCHFIELD: In addition, you also have -- you also have a thick volume -- you have a thick volume of the Code of Federal Regulations of the Federal Election Commission, which did not exist at the time of Buckley. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel. MR. BURCHFIELD: Thank you, Your Honor. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-536_21o2.pdf |
|
Date: February 4th, 2014 11:33 AM Author: Appetizing Trailer Park LOL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24954821) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:55 PM Author: Spectacular market sex offender Lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097898) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2023 11:55 AM Author: Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46883188) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2013 2:20 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm a little confused, okay? I'm confused because we're talking in the abstract. This decision was based on a motion to dismiss. And there is a huge colloquy about what happens and doesn't happen. We don't have a record below. MS. MURPHY: Well - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I mean, I can go into the news, as Justice Breyer suggested. It's very hard to think that any candidate doesn't know the contributor who has enough money to give not only to himself or herself, but to any of his or her affiliates who are supporting him or her. I mean, it's nearly common sense, hard to dispute. So you're saying it can't happen, but I don't see charges of coordination going on that much. MS. MURPHY: I guess I'm not sure what you're talking about happening. |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:09 PM Author: exciting abusive cruise ship (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32510971) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:23 PM Author: Charismatic turdskin (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097674) |
|
Date: November 4th, 2013 1:41 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: But you told me -- you started by saying that our personal jurisdiction and venue provisions and jurisprudence center on a defendant's action, not on the plaintiff's action or injury. Calder suggests otherwise. But how do you respond, not only to Justice -- I'll do this after, but let me just pose the question and you can answer it on your rebuttal. MR. BUCHOLTZ: Thank you. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm worried about the Internet effects from somebody's account in Vermont by someone in Illinois -- the hypothetical on page 19, who steals something from a store in California. MR. BUCHOLTZ: Thank you, Justice Sotomayor. If I may, I'll reserve the balance of my time and, as you suggested, address that on rebuttal. Thank you. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Okay. Thank you, counsel. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-574_k5gm.pdf |
|
Date: June 14th, 2015 12:07 PM Author: sinister stag film headpube OMG pwn pwn pwn (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28116026) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:27 PM Author: Charismatic turdskin (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097704) |
|
Date: December 3rd, 2013 10:06 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor MR. CLEMENT: The second thing is I think you have to understand in the context - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Did a unitary contract? MR. CLEMENT: I'm sorry. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm not sure I understand that point. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-462_p86a.pdf |
|
Date: March 21st, 2017 9:02 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32884698) |
|
Date: May 19th, 2023 10:59 AM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46330742) |
|
Date: May 24th, 2023 12:14 AM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46348266) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2015 6:13 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: That's sort of hard to understand because we made it very clear in Smiley and in Hildebrant that we're defining legislature in this clause as meaning legislative process.
MR. CLEMENT: With with all due respect, I disagree.
--
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: And if a State constitution says that the people hold the power and they can choose a commission or however else they want to do it, isn't that the legislative process?
MR. CLEMENT: No, it's not. But, I mean, I disagree with you, Justice Sotomayor, but that's not particularly important.
---
THIS IS THE GOLD MINE BELOW
---
MR. CLEMENT: I think they would have the power to do an initiative. I don't think they would have to do the power to do a referendum.
One of the ironies is that my friends on the other side like to talk about the power of the people, but the maps that the commission promulgates are not subject to override by referendum the way the maps of the legislature were before Proposition 106 passed.
So I think all the legislature could do is what any citizen should do which is to propose an alternative map by initiative process. But whatever that is, that's not the primary power to prescribe congressional districts or to make election regulations. That puts the State legislature on the same plain as the people, and we know --
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So please tell me --
JUSTICE SCALIA: Do I understand you to say that it would be okay if the legislature itself established this commission?
MR. CLEMENT: I would I would take the position that that is okay because that is a delegation of authority. If you disagree with me, I mean, you know, you may disagree with me, but I think my position is consistent with what this Court said in the McPherson case about the authority of the State legislatures to prescribe rules for electorates. They can delegate that to some commission and come up with it that way, but if they want to take the authority back, as they did in the in the Michigan piece of legislation at issue in McPherson, you bet they can do that, and if the State tries to stop them from taking it back, that's a constitutional problem.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So --
JUSTICE KAGAN: So tell me, Mr. Clement, there's the State sets up this independent commission and the independent commission has a veto power on the State's redistricting. In other words, the State can do redistricting and then it submits it to the independent commission, and the independent commission can say, No, go back, do it again.
MR. CLEMENT: Well, if I mean, I guess it depends a little bit on the details of how that works and whether who's got the ultimate last say in the matter.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/13-1314_q8l1.pdf |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 7:50 PM Author: blue temple "So what about the lemon pledge? I just want to make sure that there is enough lemon pledge" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29964226) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2017 9:03 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32884712) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2023 11:56 AM Author: Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46883194) |
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:49 PM Author: Domesticated Area yeah but she does have dat LIFE EXPERIENCE (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440045) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:50 PM Author: Translucent Thirsty Tank Shitlib obama's america (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440048) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:50 PM Author: Diverse Field New Version "But what is the rule you want us to articulate?" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440051) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:52 PM Author: nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead Anyone that asks or cares about SCOTUS questions is a fucking idiot. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440066) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:53 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house ? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440073) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:55 PM Author: nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead they're useless (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440079) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:55 PM Author: internet-worthy idiotic center hominid naw (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440082) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:05 PM Author: Effete massive digit ratio There seem to be some cases where someone (usually Breyer or Scalia) gapes opposing counsel and that exchange is included as a big part of the opinion which Kennedy signs on to. Whether or not he would've voted that anyway, of course, is an unanswerable question. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440122) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 2:18 PM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich it's not that oral arg is relevant; it's that oral arg is evidence that we have a fucking moronic spic on the court. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22444621) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2013 3:16 PM Author: excitant topaz dysfunction and the wise italian politico or his nigga slave are any smarter? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22839265) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 1:18 PM Author: marvelous national scalia is certainly smarter. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883335) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 2:25 PM Author: electric haunting circlehead His Obamacare performance tops anything in this thread. It was a sad day for those of us who have thought of him as a conservastud and went to law school when his various 90s era pwnages were steadily populating the case books. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23151242) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:44 PM Author: beady-eyed unhinged cuckold den thomas doesn't try to peacock for counsel (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883735) |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:29 PM Author: beady-eyed unhinged cuckold den damn right son (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32511131) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:53 PM Author: mind-boggling electric furnace bc she's full of herself. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440071) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 6:53 PM Author: Chest-beating bateful address just wait til there are three "wise latinas" on the court (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440072) |
|
Date: April 23rd, 2013 11:35 PM Author: Laughsome preventive strike jesus christ, that would be like a drunk mariachi band in tijuana. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064202) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:55 AM Author: Floppy house candlestick maker unwise latinas (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186576) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:04 PM Author: swashbuckling wrinkle diabeetus (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440116) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 9:03 PM Author: blue temple One can hope (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29965032) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:08 PM Author: Titillating resort just out of curiosity what drives you to listen to SCOTUS oral argument? i can see reading the briefs and opinions, but why would anyone care about the oral argument (unless maybe you are an appellate lawyer trying to improve, i guess). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440136) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:11 PM Author: comical son of senegal shrine "Reading the tea leaves" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440161) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 2:24 PM Author: Rambunctious nursing home They are the most fun part. Few people read them, so from time to time you can PWN opposing counsel when they make a tenuous argument based on the opinion by quoting some language from the opinion writer that shows that the court considered and rejected whatever bullshit they are trying to promote. It doesn't win motions but it tells opposing counsel that you are more through than they are. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22444648) |
|
Date: April 23rd, 2013 11:49 PM Author: Stirring Hateful Home Kill yourself. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064351) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2013 12:46 PM Author: violent self-absorbed nibblets (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24290871) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2016 3:37 PM Author: Crusty arrogant locus goyim ? there is nothing wrong with his response (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31768563) |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:24 PM Author: concupiscible stain indian lodge (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968226) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:12 PM Author: arousing philosopher-king REMINDER: They just make shit up. If you argue against this position then you are stupid as fuck. And by the way, brown v. board and roe v. wade are prime examples of not following the law and making shit up. Horrible legal decisions.
About as prestigious as being on the Court of "People who make shit up in order to change the law in a way that is somewhat controversial but morally popular." I mean, that is kindov cool but lets quit acting like its scholarship. |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:13 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house This is another problem altogether. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440175) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 5:16 PM Author: arousing philosopher-king (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22445650) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:23 PM Author: Turquoise slippery pistol space cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440216) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:32 PM Author: nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead If someone wants to grow medical marijuana in their house for personal consumption, the commerce clause is all powerful and we should ignore Lopez and makes 6 leaps of faith about how it could affect interstate commerce.
But when a coal plant wants to spew NOx, SO2 with impunity across state lines, the commerce clause is weak and worthless and the cross state air pollution rule needs to be struck down.
Lol at double thinking Orwellian reptiles. |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:34 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house Clarence Thomas was on the right side of Gonzalez v. Raich, dude. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440289) |
|
Date: November 13th, 2016 12:22 PM Author: aquamarine vivacious old irish cottage (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31896956) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 5:05 PM Author: well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug Dee, you got pwned last time you made this point, but again: the EPA case wasn't a commerce clause case at all. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22445592) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 5:07 PM Author: Effete massive digit ratio (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22445606) |
|
Date: February 16th, 2013 4:09 PM Author: vigorous chrome stage idea he suggested (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22650844) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2013 10:23 AM Author: Thriller church building cuck (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23241250) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:55 PM Author: nudist bat shit crazy foreskin stead jfc I destroy full time attorneys on this website (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883785) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 3:01 PM Author: coral aphrodisiac mental disorder messiness cr, actually (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883817) |
|
Date: April 23rd, 2013 11:54 PM Author: Racy Useless Theater French Chef (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064407) |
|
Date: October 15th, 2013 7:34 PM Author: slimy boyish box office place of business To be fair,
(Part-time attorney) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 6:01 PM Author: Floppy house candlestick maker yeah, and the Dems NEVER doublethink (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36189802) |
|
Date: June 14th, 2015 1:00 PM Author: arousing philosopher-king (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28116245) |
|
Date: June 26th, 2015 10:43 AM Author: arousing philosopher-king REMINDER (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28203556) |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:23 PM Author: self-centered cocky associate library Great post. RIP (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968218) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2023 11:38 AM Author: Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46883093) |
|
Date: January 15th, 2013 7:31 PM Author: sexy chapel oral arguments are flame (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22440270) |
|
Date: January 16th, 2013 5:07 PM Author: pink hyperactive school cafeteria fortuitous meteor She's in poor health anyway. She'll be lucky to live another ten years. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22445601) |
|
Date: May 23rd, 2023 11:52 PM Author: Seedy hairless university mother ay caramba, que suerte! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46348189) |
|
Date: February 16th, 2013 3:58 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-1085.pdf (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22650818) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2013 3:10 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22839240) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 2:50 PM Author: bistre mediation bendito (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22883758) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 5:31 PM Author: soul-stirring ratface (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22884762) |
|
Date: March 26th, 2013 5:28 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22884729) |
|
Date: March 27th, 2013 12:36 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle onyx persian (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22889573) |
|
Date: March 27th, 2013 12:45 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#22889630) |
|
Date: April 23rd, 2013 11:55 PM Author: red multi-billionaire public bath ive heard both of them speak, they seem brilliant (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064410) |
|
Date: April 24th, 2013 12:22 AM Author: Transparent flickering site half-breed Kagan is very smart. She's up there with Roberts. Soto is just pandering to the masses. I guess its fine, I bet they vote almost 100% the same way. We're just teaching people that we don't live in a meritocracy, which i guess has always been the case (given that the sup ct was historically 100% white male). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064694) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 1:56 PM Author: slap-happy rebellious sanctuary "which i guess has always been the case (given that the sup ct was historically 100% white male)."
This is absurd. What % of the population that would be eligible for SCOTUS were not white males for most of this country's history? 2%?
You can point to decent examples that question how merit-based America was/is, but this is not one of them. |
|
Date: June 14th, 2015 12:02 PM Author: vigorous chrome stage idea he suggested Libs are stupid. Bc we didn't have transkins of color on the court it was RACIST (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28116003) |
|
Date: April 24th, 2013 12:00 AM Author: Sick internal respiration station Reminder: This is why Justice Thomas keeps his mouth shut. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064439) |
|
Date: April 24th, 2013 12:04 AM Author: judgmental lodge boistinker which is pretty sad actually. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064491) |
|
Date: December 9th, 2015 7:34 PM Author: ebony really tough guy This was the first thought that came to my mind.
But wasn't he GC at Monsanto? |
|
Date: March 21st, 2018 5:53 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house Justice Thomas is brilliant and our greatest living justice. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#35655304) |
|
Date: April 24th, 2013 12:03 AM Author: judgmental lodge boistinker I can't even read all of this drivel. She is as smart as any of the other justices. She asks questions that are as compelling as Kagan's. And let's not forget she graduated scl from Princeton. There's no affirmative action in that designation. How many of you all have done that? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064469) |
|
Date: April 24th, 2013 12:08 AM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor Her thesis was about a Puerto Rican no one had heard of, which was graded by the new Latino studies prof after she blitzed the school with a campaign to create one. BUT I BET IT WAS ALL ON THE MERIT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN COMFORTABLE GIVING HER A B+ FOR HER LATINO THESIS. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064526) |
|
Date: April 24th, 2013 12:11 AM Author: judgmental lodge boistinker You have to go into the thesis phase with summa grades to earn the scl post-thesis.
So ridiculous. No one would be questioning a white student's scl.
I heard a white law firm partner told her she was only at YLS on affirmative action. I would have told him about my Princeton scl and proceeded to bitch slap him. |
|
Date: April 24th, 2013 12:17 AM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor Brother, the article boasting about her academics says she got "almost straight A's her last two years," which is two caveats too many. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23064637) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 3:05 PM Author: Sticky drab international law enforcement agency (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23151474) |
|
Date: November 13th, 2016 12:35 PM Author: lemon giraffe plaza (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31897131) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 1:57 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle onyx persian LOL you are truly a dumb clueless idiot. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23151045) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 2:57 PM Author: shaky gunner quadroon (member of the latino law students ass'n.) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23151426) |
|
Date: February 4th, 2014 11:35 AM Author: Appetizing Trailer Park i hope this was a low IQ schtick, jfc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24954830) |
|
Date: May 7th, 2013 1:42 PM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#23150962) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2013 8:58 AM Author: buff faggot firefighter parlor LOL http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/supreme_court_brief.jsp
she hates us for criticizing oral argument.
|
|
Date: October 15th, 2013 7:23 PM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich "GAME POST"????
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who has credited affirmative action with helping her attain an Ivy League education, scoffed.
"It's always wonderful for minorities that they finally get in, they finally have children, and now you're going to do away [with] that preference for them," she said. "It seems that the game post keeps changing every few years for minorities."
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304330904579137840115177628 |
|
Date: October 15th, 2013 7:25 PM Author: Awkward mahogany native i tink she meant goal poast (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24240325) |
|
Date: October 15th, 2013 7:37 PM Author: gay autistic black woman property LOL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24240402) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2013 12:32 PM Author: Irate supple rehab macaca but don't they get the alumni preference? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24290793) |
|
Date: November 4th, 2013 1:45 PM Author: Odious mexican windowlicker Every pro-AA person has been arguing for abolition of alum preferences but now that Sotomayor has been to Princeton she starts arguing for keep the preferences. How stupid is she? Obviously she is not truly stupid but she sure is not smart. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24367970) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:46 AM Author: vibrant elastic band whorehouse Julia pls respond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186526) |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2013 12:14 PM Author: gay autistic black woman property (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24290715) |
|
Date: February 4th, 2014 11:29 AM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=2486228&mc=65&forum_id=2#24954283 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24954801) |
|
Date: February 4th, 2014 11:35 AM Author: twinkling gaming laptop Now that these elite libs (the lib justices) have to deal with AA on a daily basis, will they now overturn it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#24954831) |
|
Date: April 7th, 2016 10:59 AM Author: lemon giraffe plaza (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30220080) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:55 AM Author: Floppy house candlestick maker ALL scotus justices are LIB...all federal judges are lib...period (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186580) |
|
Date: March 10th, 2014 10:43 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#25167423) |
|
Date: April 22nd, 2014 8:29 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#25428392) |
|
Date: October 26th, 2014 4:18 PM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich <<Sotomayor said one of her attributes is her sense of “powerful concentration,” but acknowledged that the way that sometimes plays out during oral arguments — where she becomes a domineering figure — is bothersome to colleagues.>>
no, her utter stupidity is bothersome to colleagues.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/justices-who-graduated-from-yale-law-school-hold-court/2014/10/25/e0f09c38-5a28-11e4-8264-deed989ae9a2_story.html |
|
Date: January 25th, 2015 3:51 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#27183891) |
|
Date: June 14th, 2015 11:56 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28115976) |
|
Date: June 14th, 2015 12:08 PM Author: violent self-absorbed nibblets (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28116032) |
|
Date: June 26th, 2015 10:57 AM Author: arousing philosopher-king (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#28203680) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2015 3:33 PM Author: well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug 16 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So I guess my question 17 is, we've now taken a word, concreteness, that the Court 18 in recent years has applied to injuries by citizens and 19 when they can bring actions or not. A generalized 20 grievance, we said, of a taxpayer is not concrete 21 enough. 22 We've taken this doctrine, and you're trying 23 to superimpose the word "concrete" into legally created 24 rights. But for for two decades on, I mean, two 25 centuries, we've always said in our case law, that 1 injury in fact is the breach of a legally recognized 2 right. Where do we have a right? I think that's 3 Justice Kagan's question. 4 JUSTICE KAGAN: No. 5 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: It's a requirement. 6 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Why don't you answer 7 Justice Sotomayor's question first? 8 MR. PINCUS: Respectfully, I don't think 9 that the cases say that. We discuss them in detail in 10 our in our blue brief. I think what the Court said 11 in Warth and Linda R.S. was about what the Court said in 12 Lujan, which is, de facto injuries as to which there's 13 no cause of action can be made actionable when Congress 14 creates a cause of action. 15 That's quite different from saying that 16 something that doesn't qualify under this Court's 17 injuryinfact standard as tangible harm can be made 18 actionable, which is what the Ninth Circuit decided 19 here. 20 And I also I want to also 21 JUSTICE KAGAN: Well, I agree with you 22 entirely on that. |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2015 3:48 PM Author: violent self-absorbed nibblets (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29095089) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2015 3:50 PM Author: histrionic gas station (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29095109) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2015 3:42 PM Author: Mewling cerebral office police squad At least Thomas is smart enough to realize he's a dumbass and shuts the fuck up during oral argument (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29095040) |
|
Date: December 9th, 2015 7:33 PM Author: Talented frozen brunch friendly grandma , the pumo lisped (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29345234) |
|
Date: December 9th, 2015 7:15 PM Author: yellow step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29345132) |
|
Date: December 9th, 2015 8:00 PM Author: Erotic Ultramarine Hall Sotomayor shows the fatigue of one camouflaging how very often she seems to be ineffectively punching above her real intellectual weight. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29345432) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2015 10:41 AM Author: alcoholic motley stock car JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Mr. Garre, this is the fundamental problem that I think Justice Alito is pointing to, and you're sort of talking past each other. So maybe I'll explain his view.
(Laughter)
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Strange, isn't that?
JUSTICE ALITO: I --I could use-- I can use the help.
(Laughter.)
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I think I'll explain what his view is.
|
|
Date: July 11th, 2018 11:06 AM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36404527) |
|
Date: January 20th, 2016 6:11 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29641178) |
|
Date: February 16th, 2016 10:45 AM Author: Grizzly voyeur halford (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29841863) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 2:59 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution In abortion case, J. Sotomayor kept asking questions after Roberts signaled that time was over. "Sonia is off," J. Kennedy said to Roberts. https://twitter.com/scotusreporter/status/705116862640746497 MR. KELLER: Mr. Chief Justice, my time has expired, if may address it. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Sure. MR. KELLER: Except even there, the clinic was not just closed for a single day. It was closed for a longer period of time. And there was an El Paso clinic that actually reopened also months later. So an as applied challenge could allow a clinic, if an undue burden, if a substantial obstacle were shown because of driving distances or capacity in the future, in that discrete instance, but we're in this facial challenge posture, Petitioner's bear the heavy burden to show at least a large-- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Why isn't that selfevident in any area that's-- JUSTICE KENNEDY: Sonia is off. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: This area of western Texas, it's as big as California. No? Bigger? MR. KELLER: I'm not sure about California, but it certainly is a large size. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Huge area. MR. KELLER: Absolutely. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Why isn't it selfevident if you have a law that says you can only be an ASC provider, and who's going to come in and say, I can't be an ASC provider, but it's an undue burden on me, or it's an undue burden that's selfevident on the women in that area? MR. KELLER: Well, the right is possessed by the women. The clinics and doctors can bring challenges. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Exactly. So why don't we take this lawsuit as those women saying just that? MR. KELLER: Because there was no-- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: You can't have a law that has marginal, if any, medical benefit be applied to this procedure anywhere where there's an undue burden on people on women. |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 3:12 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond LOL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29962296) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 3:18 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car SONIA IS OFF (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29962340) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 3:53 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29962615) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2016 5:16 PM Author: ebony really tough guy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30265882) |
|
Date: March 2nd, 2016 6:06 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29963600) |
|
Date: March 5th, 2016 2:03 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#29984075) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2016 5:24 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So we announce a rule-- so we announce a rule-- CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: All right. Justice Sotomayor. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: We announce a rule that every change that affects an incumbent gives the incumbent the right to challenge the line of change. MR. CARVIN: I think any-- any time somebody is injured-in-fact-- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Just answer the question yes. Every-- this is now an incumbency protection standing rule. MR. CARVIN: No. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/14-1504_5he6.pdf |
|
Date: June 28th, 2018 3:03 PM Author: ebony really tough guy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36329279) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2016 5:36 PM Author: pink hyperactive school cafeteria fortuitous meteor She has an incredibly unhealthy diet and diabetes. She will likely pass away within a decade. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30107192) |
|
Date: March 23rd, 2016 8:35 PM Author: heady hot crackhouse http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-03-23/sotomayor-helps-puerto-rico-argue-its-bankruptcy-case
Sotomayor Helps Puerto Rico Argue Its Bankruptcy Case MARCH 23, 2016 10:42 AM EST By Noah Feldman
Before Tuesday, I’d have said that Puerto Rico had no chance to win its legal fight to let its municipalities and utilities declare bankruptcy. That's how the island hopes to resolve its overwhelming debt problems, but the federal bankruptcy code says that it can't.
That's what the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held last summer, unanimously. The statute seemed so clear that even Judge Juan Torruella, the appellate court’s only Puerto Rican member, concurred in an outraged separate opinion criticizing the federal law.
Puerto Rico's Slide
Then Sonia Sotomayor stepped in. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court rarely change the outcome of a case, yet Tuesday's session may turn out to be the exception. In a fascinating and unusual argument, Justice Sotomayor, who is herself of Puerto Rican descent, spoke by my count an astonishing 45 times. Sotomayor left no doubt that she was speaking as an advocate.
The interpretation of the law she favored would make the system fairer to Puerto Rico, allowing the commonwealth to create its own emergency bankruptcy measures outside federal law. But it depends on a highly doubtful reading of the statute, one that stretches credulity when read into the text. Ideally, Congress will hear what happened at the oral argument and pass one of the reform proposals it’s currently considering that would spare the court from having to decide the case.
First, Sotomayor walked Puerto Rico’s attorney, Christopher Landau, through his own argument with a precision that exceeded his own. She answered other justices’ hostile questions for him, better than he did. Then she dominated Matthew McGill, the lawyer for the creditors of Puerto Rico’s electrical utility, who are fighting the bankruptcy bid. In the second half of the argument, the other justices mostly stood by and let her go at him.
Sotomayor’s position, borrowed from Landau’s creative brief, was that the federal bankruptcy law doesn't mean what the appeals court considered obvious. The law says that Puerto Rico is to be considered a state for purposes of the bankruptcy code, except that, unlike a state, it may not authorize its municipalities (and by extension, its utilities) to resolve debts under Chapter 9 of the code.
According to the interpretation favored by Sotomayor, this provision does indeed mean that Puerto Rico can’t use federal bankruptcy law to let its electrical utility go into default. But at the same time, she clearly believes, the same law should be interpreted to allow Puerto Rico to create its own bankruptcy laws, under which it might be able to do just that.
The appeal of this interpretation is that it spares Puerto Rico the indignity of the First Circuit’s interpretation. According to that court, Puerto Rico is prohibited from having its own bankruptcy laws, just as the 50 states are prohibited. But uniquely (along with Washington, D.C.), Puerto Rico can’t enable municipalities or utilities to enter Chapter 9 bankruptcy.
The drawback of this reading is that by implication it gives Puerto Rico a power that no state has had for many decades – the power to create its own bankruptcy code. It seems extraordinarily unlikely that Congress really meant to give it that power, and no one has thought it did until now.
What was even more remarkable than Sotomayor’s dominance of the argument was the effect it seemed to have on her liberal colleagues. Justice Elena Kagan did something that’s rare in an oral argument: She announced that Landau (speaking under Sotomayor’s tutelage) had clarified her view. "I think I get what you're saying now, which I didn't when I started," Kagan told Landau. Initially, Kagan had seemed skeptical that Puerto Rico’s argument could be made to fit the statutory text. Now she was claiming to see the light.
Later Kagan made the point more explicit. "I came in here thinking your best argument is straight on the text," she told McGill. "But now I have a better understanding of Mr. Landau’s interpretation of the text."
Justice Stephen Breyer, who had seemed skeptical of Landau’s position, also appeared to change sides, or at least to be considering doing so.
The case, Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust, will be decided by seven justices, since the late Justice Antonin Scalia hasn’t been replaced and Justice Samuel Alito is recused. That means Sotomayor would need four votes to win. Chief Justice John Roberts spoke briefly, expressing skepticism about Puerto Rico’s position. Justice Clarence Thomas was silent. So was Justice Anthony Kennedy.
That leaves Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who could conceivably provide a fourth liberal vote in favor of Puerto Rico. She spoke sparingly, but pointedly. When Landau first stood up, she asked him if Puerto Rico would be allowed to let its electrical utility default on its debt, or whether that would violate the provision of the Constitution that says states may not impair the obligation of contracts.
Technically, not all of the Constitution applies to Puerto Rico, and Landau declined to say that Puerto Rico would be barred from a default that abrogated the utility’s contractual obligations in its debt contracts. In practice, however, there’s little doubt that the contracts clause of the Constitution would indeed apply to Puerto Rico. Ginsburg knows that perfectly well.
That’s important. She almost certainly asked her question to signal that allowing Puerto Rico to engage in some sort of emergency default wouldn’t actually sink the creditors’ real-world claims. This is as close as Ginsburg gets to hinting that she might be prepared to hold for the commonwealth.
The silent participant in this entire unusual argument is Congress, which is considering legislation that would give Puerto Rico some way to restructure its utilities’ debts. The liberal justices are telling Congress that if it doesn’t help Puerto Rico bail itself out, they may do it themselves.
I’m sure all four liberals hope that Congress was listening. A holding like the one Sotomayor was pushing would be good policy, but would push the envelope of statutory interpretation. Congress should resolve this issue soon, before June, so that a hard case doesn’t make questionable law. |
|
Date: April 5th, 2016 8:39 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30209732) |
|
Date: April 7th, 2016 10:54 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution "Wow this job is way harder than I thought it would be." http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/04/07/sonia-sotomayor-the-job-of-a-justice-has-gotten-much-more-complicated/?mod=WSJBlog (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30220064) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2016 5:28 PM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30265959) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:35 PM Author: Charismatic turdskin (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097774) |
|
Date: April 18th, 2016 8:45 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution Gonna be an epic day for her idiocy today! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30296195) |
|
Date: April 18th, 2016 9:23 PM Author: nofapping lay nowag KILLSHOT
During an oral argument that frequently veered into the swamps of supposition, speculation and outright imagination, Justice Sotomayor stuck to these concrete, undisputed numbers. In an exchange with Donald Verrilli, the United States Solicitor General, she asked him to confirm that “you only deport 400,000” annually.
“We have resources for about 400,000,” Mr. Verrilli responded. “Right.”
“So we have basically 10 million, nine hundred thousand people that cannot be deported because there’s not enough resources, correct?” Justice Sotomayor said.
“That’s correct,” Mr. Verrilli replied.
“So,” Justice Sotomayor concluded, “they are here whether we want them or not.” |
|
Date: April 18th, 2016 9:25 PM Author: lascivious gaping national security agency Make America Great Again (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30300477) |
|
Date: April 22nd, 2016 6:27 AM Author: aquamarine vivacious old irish cottage http://www.vdare.com/articles/obamnesty-scotus-hearing-shows-wise-latina-sotomayor-is-embarrassment-to-court
Obamnesty SCOTUS Hearing Shows “Wise Latina” Sotomayor Is Embarrassment To Court
See also: Obamnesty At SCOTUS: Administration Ceding Opening For State-Level Immigration Patriotism
VDARE.com has long been very skeptical of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the ”wise Latina” and self-proclaimed “Affirmative Action Baby” whose nomination by Obama in 2009 was an early indication of his crude racial identity politics. Sotomayor’s bullying performance during the April 18 U.S. vs. Texas oral arguments fully justified this skepticism. She has become an embarrassment to the Court.
Supreme Court Immigration
With hundreds of demonstrators, many bused in by La Casa de Maryland, poised at the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court building waving both commercially and hand-made signs approving the Obama Administration’s Executive Amnesty effort, the battle lines had been drawn. Inside, at 10 o’clock the Crier of the U.S. Supreme Court banged her gavel and intoned: “Please rise….” then…“God save the United States and this honorable court,” while the justices, in order of seniority, took their seats perched above the lectern. Today would be different: there would be only one case, U.S. v. Texas, and it would last 90 minutes—something not done often during the Court’s Term, due to its national importance, described by a student of the Court as having the potential, “…to be the most important in the nation’s history.” [The Implications of United States v. Texas , By John Miano, April 14, 2016]
For the past 20 years, I have listened to oral arguments in the Court as the guest of the late Justice Antonin Scalia. On this day, it became abundantly clear that the Court’s decision will determine if America can maintain its cultural identity. And if the Obama Administration is victorious, the result will accelerate the decline not only of the historic American nation, but of its founding legal document, the U.S. Constitution.
A question early in the arguments by Chief Justice John Roberts to Donald Verrilli, Obama’s Solicitor-General of the U.S., saw that possibility:
So that [an administrative and arbitrary deadline on deportation] somehow binds the Executive branch now…this hasn’t been approved by the Executive branch prior to this point, either, and yet it’s a fairly significant departure.
In short, the Obama Administration was seeking legal justification for its unprecedented and open-ended policy of “deferred action,” or presidential non-enforcement of current immigration laws dealing with those illegally in the country.
Throughout the entire length the oral arguments, one question must have been shared by many in the packed audience which included Attorney-General Loretta Lynch: would the presence of Justice Scalia have brought about a victory for the forces of patriotic immigration reform?
Four years ago almost to the day, April 25, 2012, Scalia in his dissent in a case as applicable to the Texas governor seeking protections of his residents today, as it was to Arizona’s governor then, wrote:
A Federal Government that does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written, leaves the States’ border unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude. So the issue is a stark one. Are the sovereign States at the mercy of the Federal Executive’s refusal to enforce the Nation’s immigration law?
Both DACA and DAPA, the result of Executive Orders, were on trial at the Supreme Court. But there was another, more immediate, threat to Texas and the other 25 states that joined it in bringing their legal suits against the Obama Administration: their standing. It was evident from the outset that the four Leftist justices—Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sotomayor and Elena Kagan—would attempt to prove that the states had a no legal right to bring the case to the Supremes in the first place.
In his opening remarks challenging that ploy by the “Gang of Four,” the Solicitor-General of Texas, Scott A. Keller, undertook to explain that both DACA and DAPA had produced an “injury resulting from the challenged action.” Hence, his state and the others had “standing,” and were legally entitled to bring the lawsuit.
But his introduction was short-circuited. Within thirty seconds, Keller was challenged by Justice Sotomayor. Comparing apples to oranges, Sotomayor opined that the Fairness Act, passed in 1990, allowed more illegal aliens deferred status than either DACA or DAPA.
Keller response was immediate:
Keller: DAPA is an unprecedented unlawful assertion of executive power. DAPA would be one of the largest changes in immigration policy in our nation’s history
But here he was interrupted again:
Sotomayor: How can you say that? I mean, we have the Fairness Act that happened in 1990. It granted basically the same thing, deferred action and work authorization, to 1.5 million people out of 4 million. That was a 40 percent of the immigrant population of the time was affected. Here, the best estimate is that only 35 percent are affected. So at least once before, the President has taken action that has a greater percentage effect than now. So why is it the largest? Is it the number of people?
Keller: Well, the Family Fairness Program, first of all, was done pursuant to statutory authority [emphasis mine]. It was a voluntary departure program.
Was Sotomayor oblivious to the difference between the two references?
On at least three occasions in which I was in the Court, Sotomayor been corrected as to her reading of the law. In Arizona’s attempt to deal with damaging impact of illegal immigration, Paul Clement, the former U.S. Solicitor-General under President George W. Bush, and now attorney for Arizona, on two separate occasions stated that Justice Sotomayor had “misread the law,” a polite way of telling the justice that she was wrong. (See also Race Preferences at the Supreme Court, American Renaissance, December 18, 2015).
So Sotomayor is, in my opinion, an embarrassment to the Court. Apparently, this does not bother her; I do not believe her attitude will change.
erinmurphyBut if Keller was adequate in his defense of his state’s interests, perhaps the most impressive advocate on either side that day was Erin E. Murphy (right) who represented the U.S. House of Representatives. During her brief time in responding to questions—about 15 minutes—Murphy made it clear why she was there defending Texas.
Again, it was Sotomayor, who apparently really is incapable of understanding legal distinctions, who interrupted Murphy brusquely after the House’s counsel had just begun her opening remarks:
Murphy: Three years ago the Executive asked Congress to enact legislation that would have given it the power to authorize most of the people that are living in this country unlawfully to stay, work, and receive benefits, and Congress declined. Now the Executive comes before this Court with the extraordinary claim that it has had the power to achieve the same—
Sotomayor: Excuse me. Was that really all was that part of a package for a pathway to citizenship?
Murphy: It was not a pathway to citizenship. It was a pathway to lawful presence in the country [emphasis mine] that would have allowed individuals to have a legal status, to remain in this country, and Congress has not created a legal status for the category of individuals covered by DAPA.
Responding to a question by the Chief Justice, Murphy encapsulated the unconstitutional nature of DAPA and DACA:
Murphy: Whatever the Executive wants to label that, under its own regulations, deferred action status is equated with lawful presence. So if you cross it (“unlawful presence”) out of the DAPA memo, it’s still part of the regulatory scheme that says once we’ve taken this extra step, not just of deferring the removal of you, but of putting you into this status, that changes your eligibility for work authorization and benefits in this country. And once the Executive is doing that, we are far outside the notion of mere enforcement discretion.
What Murphy had repeated was Keller’s claim that both DACA and DAPA are illegal seizures of congressional powers which, under the U.S. Constitution, are reserved exclusively to the legislature—a concept apparently alien to Sotomayor and her three allies.
How will the case end? After two decades of observing Court proceedings, I know that justices generally do not telegraph their final vote, disguising it by the type of question they ask. However, I believe most in the courtroom that morning felt that Sotomayor and three other justices will vote in favor of the administration’s extraordinary Executive Order.
I believe also that there are at least three votes to uphold the Constitution. If Justice Anthony Kennedy, who asked the least probing questions, sides with the three, then the 4-4 split will be a victory for immigration reform patriots…at least for now. That tie will mean that the 5th Circuit Court decision last November will prevail, and that both DACA and DAPA will cease.
Or should. But do not discount the possibility of this Administration’s willingness to proceed in this matter, with Justice Sotomayor, its staunch defender, leading the charge. The Romans may have said it best: lex non rex.
|
|
Date: June 20th, 2016 6:10 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30749570) |
|
Date: June 20th, 2016 9:32 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#30750963) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2016 3:29 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Counselor, assume I agree with you-- MS. BELL: Yes, Your Honor. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: --that there were parts of your argument, both below and here in your brief, that suggested the instructional error. But what I find is that the way you presented the argument was confusing. MS. BELL: Yes. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: It took a lot of teasing out. Does--how does that affect what we do. MS. BELL: Yes, Your Honor. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: That--that you weren't clear in the instruction, don't you forfeit that argument? MS. BELL: No, Your Honor. The--the claim is that the intent to--we challenge-- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I--I know what your two claims are. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2016/15-5991_7k47.pdf |
|
Date: October 4th, 2016 3:31 PM Author: irradiated mood set Jfc (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31555796) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2016 3:43 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31555890) |
|
Date: July 11th, 2018 11:18 AM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch Wtf (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36404592) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2023 11:57 AM Author: Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46883202) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2016 3:33 PM Author: exciting abusive cruise ship She is the embodiment of the future Libs want for you (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31555809) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2017 7:11 AM Author: Galvanic casino marketing idea (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34850931) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2016 9:05 PM Author: Frum Dead Fanboi (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31673504) |
|
Date: October 24th, 2016 10:13 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE GINSBURG: When the--when the component--when the article of manufacture isn't sold apart from the entire product, how should the--the judge charge the jury on determining the profit attributable to the infringing article? MR. FLETCHER: So we think that there'd be two factual questions in a case where that's disputed. The first one would be what is the relevant article, and there may be a dispute on that as there is in this case. The second question, once the fact-finder identifies the relevant article, is the question that you asked, which is how much of the total profits from the device are attributable to the infringing article? JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: What's the first step, and how do you figure it out? JUSTICE GINSBURG: May he--may he complete his answer to my question? MR. FLETCHER: So Justice Ginsburg, on the second step, we urge the Court not to speak to that in a lot of detail because it hasn't been briefed in this case. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2016/15-777_1b82.pdf |
|
Date: October 24th, 2016 10:29 AM Author: chartreuse cowardly organic girlfriend jfc (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31714610) |
|
Date: October 24th, 2016 10:32 AM Author: violent self-absorbed nibblets (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31714619) |
|
Date: November 13th, 2016 12:49 PM Author: Trip Volcanic Crater Heaven LJL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31897263) |
|
Date: November 18th, 2016 1:51 PM Author: Talented frozen brunch friendly grandma (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31941910) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2017 8:59 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32884679) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 10:12 PM Author: dashing salmon dilemma hissy fit I'm shocked that the transcript skipped over Sotomayor burying her head in her hands muttering "Ai pappi" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33098016) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2016 3:36 PM Author: slate sweet tailpipe meetinghouse Parody or actual transcript?
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So are you suing them 16 just for the pictures that are in their catalogue? Is 17 that what you're suing them for?
18 MR. BURSCH: We're not suing them; they're 19 suing us.
20 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm sorry. You're 21 right. I apologize. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2016 3:38 PM Author: ebony really tough guy Sotomayor McCheese (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31768566) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2016 3:38 PM Author: Crusty arrogant locus goyim holy fucking shit.
that said, i love this thread. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2016 3:38 PM Author: slate sweet tailpipe meetinghouse https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2016/15-866_j426.pdf (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31768574) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2016 3:51 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car LO SIENTO SEÑOR! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31768641) |
|
Date: April 27th, 2017 1:18 PM Author: deep corner ceo Lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33176314) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:59 AM Author: outnumbered incel (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186609) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2016 3:39 PM Author: slate sweet tailpipe meetinghouse same oral argument
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: -- but you can't stop 2 them from selling their -- 3 MR. BURSCH: We can't stop them from using 4 their copyright to do anything on a printed page, or 5 even to take these designs and, like I said, put it on a 6 lunchbox or a notebook. But their copyright does not -- 7 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I transposed the two of 8 you. I apologize. 9 MR. BURSCH: No problem, Justice Sotomayor.
-----
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Mr. Bursch, I go back to 19 this point, because I'm a little confused. You started 20 by saying to me you don't want to be stopped from 21 manufacturing this particular uniform. 22 MR. BURSCH: Correct. |
|
Date: November 12th, 2016 7:47 PM Author: Crusty arrogant locus goyim (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31892440) |
|
Date: November 12th, 2016 7:48 PM Author: Anal senate karate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31892452) |
|
Date: November 13th, 2016 1:12 PM Author: glittery pocket flask This is devastating (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31897511) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2016 5:35 PM Author: Greedy locale fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#31908117) |
|
Date: January 18th, 2017 3:50 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Let's go back to, if we can, the earlier part of Justice Breyer's question. 1052 has two components. You can't disparate or falsely suggest a connection with a person institution. Are you challenging or saying that the second part of 1052 falsely suggests the connection is unconstitutional as well? MR. CONNELL: That's not the question before this Court. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I know. But your argument earlier was that if someone slanders or libels an individual by saying--Trump before he was a public figure--Trump is a thief and that becomes their trademark, that even if they go to court and prove that that's a libel or a slander, that trademark would still exist and would be capable of use because otherwise canceling it would be an abridgement of the First Amendment? MR. CONNELL: I believe that's correct. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: That makes no sense. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2016/15-1293_l6gn.pdf |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:11 PM Author: Razzmatazz lime becky can you provide more context? is sotomayor saying that "trump is a thief" is not protectd by the first amendment? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32510992) |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:13 PM Author: fuchsia adventurous pit coldplay fan think she's saying you can't trademark it because it's libelous. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32511003) |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:15 PM Author: Razzmatazz lime becky yeah but she's saying that the position that you can't cancel the trademark because it would violate the first amendment to do so is ridiculous, no? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32511014) |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:17 PM Author: fuchsia adventurous pit coldplay fan she's saying that's the lawyers position and it makes no sense. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32511027) |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:18 PM Author: Razzmatazz lime becky yeah, so she thinks that the first amendment doesn't protect the claim "trump is a thief"? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32511034) |
|
Date: January 31st, 2017 4:15 PM Author: exciting abusive cruise ship (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32511013) |
|
Date: February 16th, 2017 6:27 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32638729) |
|
Date: February 28th, 2017 3:05 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution MR. STOLER: Well, as Justice Kagan and I discussed, on day is an additional punishment. And one day-- JUSTICE KAGAN: She's Justice Sotomayor. Mr. STOLER: I'm sorry. Wrong end. (Laughter.) JUSTICE KAGAN: She was the one helping you. (Laughter.) MR. STOLER: I'm sorry. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: This is the-- JUSTICE KAGAN: I was the one who wasn't. (Laughter.) MR. STOLER: I got my ends mixed up. I'm sorry. But as was--as was indicated, that is an additional sentence. That is an additional punishment that is provided for according to the statutory provisions. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2016/15-9260_bq7c.pdf |
|
Date: February 28th, 2017 3:10 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car Kagan scrambling to get on the record that she's not associated with Sotomayor's comments (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32720341) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2017 9:05 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32884719) |
|
Date: February 28th, 2017 3:14 PM Author: ebony really tough guy MR. HILLIARD: That's right. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Personal general jurisdiction. MR. HILLIARD: Justice Ginsburg -- I mean, excuse me -- Justice Sotomayor. I do not -- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: That's the first time ever. (Laughter.) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2017 9:02 PM Author: bull headed school (insane quoter of bland SCOTUS oral arguments) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32884706) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2017 8:57 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32884666) |
|
Date: April 4th, 2017 12:04 AM Author: yellow step-uncle's house (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32987781) |
|
Date: April 4th, 2017 12:12 AM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#32987833) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 8:50 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Could you please tell me, besides this voluntary settlement issue, what else is jurisdictional? What else besides something that doesn't match 7512, the furlough and suspension? MR. FLETCHER: Right. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So if we go down your route, and I'm writing that opinion--which I hope not, but if I were-- (Laughter.) https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2016/16-399_3f14.pdf |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 8:54 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097389) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:18 PM Author: insecure rusted forum partner (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097612) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:20 PM Author: Fear-inspiring fragrant base An enterprising person could turn this thread into a helluva long form piece. Judiciously constructed it could even sneak into the WaPo or similar. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097631) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:21 PM Author: Anal senate karate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097647) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:45 PM Author: Fear-inspiring fragrant base Couldn't be framed that way at all. Would have to adopt a derailing/collegiality angle. The dummy angle would have to be read in by readers with brain cells. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097834) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:21 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097651) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:27 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond “Being a judge was the most terrifying event in my life,” she said. “I was convinced I was gonna fail” but was determined to “die trying,” working seven days a week and long hours each day as she broke into her new positions. “I’m not the smartest person in the Supreme Court room,” she said.
http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/At-UC-Berkeley-Justice-Sotomayor-discusses-10991435.php |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:38 PM Author: Charismatic turdskin lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097789) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:50 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097857) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:48 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car "Sotomayor later explained that the 'Supreme Court room' is the name given to one of the dining areas near the Union Station Sbarro where she works nightly shifts." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097847) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:50 PM Author: bull headed school odd case. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097858) |
|
Date: April 17th, 2017 9:57 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33097918) |
|
Date: April 27th, 2017 1:14 PM Author: Amethyst passionate double fault stage what does she mean here?
MS. MAYNARD: The statute provides powerful incentives for the sponsors to continue through the process, Justice Sotomayor. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: All incentives have a way of failing. Just look at our society. |
|
Date: April 28th, 2017 10:40 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33188530) |
|
Date: May 22nd, 2017 4:17 PM Author: well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug Lol is that for real? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33368278) |
|
Date: May 22nd, 2017 3:50 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution In 7 years, Sotomayor has written zero divide majority opinions. https://empiricalscotus.com/2017/05/22/the-first-batch/ |
|
Date: May 22nd, 2017 3:55 PM Author: lemon giraffe plaza Has Roberts let her sign any of the denial of cert. orders? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33368136) |
|
Date: May 22nd, 2017 4:01 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car So the liberal justices don't trust her either (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33368169) |
|
Date: June 20th, 2017 10:21 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car But she just issued yet another lone dissenting opinion in the personal jurisdiction case (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33605693) |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2022 7:14 PM Author: Dark curious point newt TBF, she holds down 3 full-time jobs (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#45426918) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2017 3:20 PM Author: well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug SCOTUS rules 8-0. Sotomayor separately concurs, joined by no one, to note that while she thinks that the unanimous Court got it right on the clear text of the statute, she's nonetheless "troubled" because the legislative history doesn't support the outcome. Not because the legislative history contradicts or undermines the outcome in any way, but rather because there is no legislative history on the issue at all.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/16-74_5i36.pdf |
|
Date: June 5th, 2017 3:39 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car Kagan, the majority opinion author, probably wiped her ass with Sotomayor's useless 2-page concurrence. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33479235) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2017 3:44 PM Author: lemon giraffe plaza Maybe she thinks she can't be seen as going around following the clear text of statutes without objection, thereby undermining the authority of legislative history in future cases. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33479272) |
|
Date: June 20th, 2017 10:16 PM Author: rough-skinned hell generalized bond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33605651) |
|
Date: June 26th, 2017 6:30 PM Author: olive razzle dopamine principal's office (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#33647915) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 9:01 AM Author: self-centered cocky associate library (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34307550) |
|
Date: October 3rd, 2017 9:09 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: But I'm really - I'm very interested in the answer, which is Justice Gorsuch is -- is asking how you -- where do you draw the line? So acceptable civil vagueness and non-acceptable civil vagueness? https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/15-1498_886b.pdf |
|
Date: October 3rd, 2017 9:13 AM Author: pea-brained depressive lol thank you Obama (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34354698) |
|
Date: October 3rd, 2017 9:22 AM Author: hairraiser state jew *turns directly to Gorsuch* "Anyway your honor as I was saying..." |
|
Date: October 3rd, 2017 9:13 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I'm sorry, but why -- JUSTICE KAGAN: Well, why is it directed there if it doesn't say that? I mean, in fact, we said the opposite in Eastex. We said employees seeking to improve working conditions through resort to administrative and judicial forums, essentially the legislatures and the courthouses and the agencies, is covered by the mutual aid or protection clause. So, you know, in Eastex, we came up against this question, said it was very clear that the mutual aid and protection clause swept further than the workplace itself, as long as the ultimate goals were workplace-related, whether you took those goals to the -- in the -- you know, activity in the workplace or in the agencies or in the courts, it didn't matter at all, it was all covered by Section 7. MR. CLEMENT: That's right, Justice Kagan, but the key words there are "resort to." There's no right in Section 7 or anywhere else in the NLRA to proceed as a class once you get there. -- MR. CLEMENT: Well, the issue is just as the employer can raise a numerosity defense or a typicality defense, the employer can raise a defense that you agreed to arbitrate this claim. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Mr. Clement - MR. CLEMENT: And that should be enforceable -- and then, when you get to the arbitration forum, just as you take Rule 23 as a given, you should take the rules of the arbitration forum as a given. And this is the way it applies in every other context - JUSTICE GINSBURG: Mr. Clement -- Mr. Clement, you recognize that this kind of contract, this -- there is no true bargaining. It's the employer says you want to work here, you sign this. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-285_1qm2.pdf |
|
Date: October 4th, 2017 10:06 PM Author: Opaque stimulating affirmative action Slate has an article praising Sotomayor's devastatingly effect bench rhetoric:
Here's an example they highlight of her overwhelming intellectual force:
“I really don’t understand what that means,” Sotomayor responded. |
|
Date: October 5th, 2017 8:15 AM Author: 180 spruce theater stage indirect expression lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34371981) |
|
Date: October 5th, 2017 11:43 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution lol not gonna click but assume it's that mouthbreather Stern (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34373047) |
|
Date: October 5th, 2017 11:46 AM Author: alcoholic motley stock car Beautiful photo they used of her
http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/171004_JURIS_Sotomayor-GillvWhitford.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2.jpg |
|
Date: December 6th, 2017 4:55 AM Author: Galvanic casino marketing idea JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: You know, the other night I had some people over and one of them brought a box of cupcakes and one of the cupcakes was smashed against the box. That was the only cupcake not eaten.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-111_f314.pdf
Yes, she really said that. During a Supreme Court oral argument. |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:07 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car Libs sweating profusely as extreme diabetic Sotomayor grabs her third cupcake of the night (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968068) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2018 11:27 AM Author: self-centered cocky associate library (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#35498013) |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:16 PM Author: pungent business firm trust fund "and as it turns out, the cupcakes that 'vanished' due to the 'ghost' were just stuck to the top of the box," she concluded after twenty minutes. "Okay, your argument time is up." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968141) |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:16 PM Author: Azure misunderstood party of the first part come on post the whole thing....
MS. WAGGONER: Certainly not all cakes
would be considered speech, but in the wedding
context, Mr. Phillips is painting on a blank
canvas. He is creating a painting on that
canvas that expresses messages, and including
words and symbols in those messages.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: You know, the
other night I had some people over and one of
them brought a box of cupcakes and one of the
cupcakes was smashed against the box. That was
the only cupcake not eaten.
Now, I suspect that one of the reasons
is the others were so much more attractive
whole. There is creation in serving food, in
creating any type of edible product.
People -- there are sandwich artists
now. There are people who create beauty in
what they make, but we still don't call it
expressive and entitled to First Amendment
protection.
MS. WAGGONER: No, but when we have
someone that is sketching and sculpting and
hand designing something, that is creating a
temporary sculpture that serves as the
centerpiece of what they believe to be a
religious wedding celebration, that cake
expresses a message. |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:03 PM Author: exciting abusive cruise ship (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968008) |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:17 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution MS. WAGGONER: It's not just about what the individual thinks they are communicating. This Court also routinely makes that inquiry in all kinds of situations in all free-speech cases. Second, though, the Hurley framework provides a framework for this Court to make those decisions and to protect individuals. The way that it does that is it asks: Is the individual who's being compelled to speak objecting to the message that is contained in that speech or the person? And that's usually a very obvious inquiry. If it's connected - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Would. You. Stop. Would that belief that expresses speech trump public accommodation laws against discrimination or protecting customers from race? Yes or no. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-111_f314.pdf |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:19 PM Author: pungent business firm trust fund I'm sure he said it's not implicated or whatever, but the answer is plainly "yes." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968165) |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:19 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE ALITO: One thing that's disturbing about the record here, in addition to the statement made, the statement that Justice Kennedy read, which was not disavowed at the time by any other member of the Commission, is what appears to be a practice of discriminatory treatment based on viewpoint. The -- the Commission had before it the example of three complaints filed by an individual whose creed includes the traditional Judeo-Christian opposition to same-sex marriage, and he requested cakes that expressed that point of view, and those -- there were bakers who said no, we won't do that because it is offensive. And the Commission said: That's okay. It's okay for a baker who supports same-sex marriage to refuse to create a cake with a message that is opposed to same-sex marriage. But when the tables are turned and you have the baker who opposes same-sex marriage, that baker may be compelled to create a cake that expresses approval of same-sex marriage. MR. YARGER: Justice Alito - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Counselor, in that case - CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Maybe you could answer -- maybe you could Justice Alito's question. MR. YARGER: Yes, Mr. Chief Justice. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-111_f314.pdf |
|
Date: December 20th, 2017 3:22 PM Author: pungent business firm trust fund One day CJ Roberts is just going to come out and say "shut the fuck up you stupid AA bitch, we'd like to consider actually germane arguments for a bit." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#34968208) |
|
Date: July 11th, 2018 11:03 AM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch Jfc (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36404510) |
|
Date: January 8th, 2018 12:50 AM Author: alcoholic motley stock car Sotomayor wrote a stupid concurrence in a sentencing case that no one agreed with and now it's the subject of a case that SCOTUS recently granted cert. Lol at this question presented:
"2. Whether, under Marks, the lower courts are bound by the four-Justice plurality opinion in Freeman, or, instead, by Justice Sotomayor’s separate concurring opinion with which all eight other Justices disagreed." |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 10:46 AM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch Lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186883) |
|
Date: January 17th, 2018 8:48 PM Author: Violent territorial hospital in a case where the lawyer admitted the client's guilt over the client's objection, Soto gets completely sidetracked on a hypo about perjured testimony that isn't germane so the lawyer and the court have to get the argument back on track.
JUSTICE ALITO: Mr. Waxman, let me - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Mr. Waxman, this
sounds like a -- my ethics class in law school,
and this very hypothetical of what do you do
with a lying client?
And it was my understanding that every
ethics rule requires the lawyer to put the
client on the stand but not assist the client
in telling the lie by -- you can put him on the
stand and say tell your story. And if the
judge or someone objects that your -- that this
person's rambling on, you say to the judge: I
cannot ask questions. My client has directed
me to put him or her on the stand.
People can walk themselves into jail.
They can walk themselves, regrettably, into the
gas chamber. But they have a right to tell
their story.
MR. WAXMAN: They have -- they have
the same -- I mean, Your Honor's understanding,
this is not a question of ethics rules -
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Absolutely not.
MR. WAXMAN: -- about perjured
testimony or anything.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: But the question
MR. WAXMAN: Your Honor's
understanding is correct as to - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: So let me find - MR. WAXMAN: -- the vast majority of
jurisdictions.
JUSTICE ALITO: Well, could I ask you
about - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: May I ask -- may I
just -
JUSTICE ALITO: Mr. Waxman, could I
ask you about, because I want to understand
where the -- the line is here.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-8255_7l48.pdf |
|
Date: January 17th, 2018 8:52 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car The frustration in Alito's voice jumps off the page (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#35179702) |
|
Date: January 18th, 2018 9:13 AM Author: Violent territorial hospital (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#35182051) |
|
Date: February 26th, 2018 1:30 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: It's not going to change whether the union asks for it or the employees come -- what you're now saying is if the employees came into an auditorium at a business site of the state and every one of them got up and said, I want higher wages, the scale of that demand makes it protected by the First Amendment? It's still a work-related demand. MR. MESSENGER: Well, in that hypothetical, it would arguably be a matter of public concern if there was a stage-in, you know, at a public auditorium in which employees stood up. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Well, let's -let's not -- don't put in facts. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-1466_gebh.pdf |
|
Date: February 26th, 2018 1:33 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: -- Breyer said, every single decision affects the public fisc. Every time you lose something, you -- the public fisc is affected. You are talking - CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Care to comment? MR. MESSENGER: Again, to go back, I think it's the scale that makes the distinction, Your Honor. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel. The case is submitted. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-1466_gebh.pdf |
|
Date: February 27th, 2018 11:25 AM Author: alcoholic motley stock car Roberts FINALLY let Sotomayor write a majority opinion...for a 9-0 decision about bankruptcy law. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#35498002) |
|
Date: March 21st, 2018 6:58 PM Author: lemon giraffe plaza *Sotomayor hits send*
*notices typo in first line* |
|
Date: February 27th, 2018 7:50 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I -- I'm sorry, I'm -- I'm now -- I guess my imagination is running wild. (Laughter.) JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: How -- how does - who tells the robot what to do and what does the robot do? MR. ROSENKRANZ: A human being in, let's say, Redmond tells the robot -- it sends the robot instructions. And, by the way, the computer scientists' amicus brief spells this out in great detail. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Okay. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/17-2_j4ek.pdf |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 10:45 AM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch Lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186874) |
|
Date: March 28th, 2018 9:02 PM Author: lemon giraffe plaza "Not surprisingly, Sotomayor was first out of the gate at argument . . . This exchange lasted several minutes, with Sotomayor asking the first five questions of the morning. But just as the argument was veering into the weeds of statutory construction, Chief Justice John Roberts steered it back . . ."
http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/03/argument-analysis-we-know-how-to-get-to-five-justices-debate-precedent-in-the-absence-of-a-majority-opinion/ |
|
Date: May 2nd, 2018 3:37 PM Author: exciting abusive cruise ship (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#35967712) |
|
Date: June 5th, 2018 9:50 AM Author: Garrison (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36186548) |
|
Date: June 26th, 2018 8:55 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36315192) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2018 3:17 PM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36320957) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2018 2:36 PM Author: Soggy drunken ticket booth faggotry This has now been empirically confirmed: https://empiricalscotus.com/2018/08/01/a-little-change/ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36557704) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2018 2:42 PM Author: Seedy hairless university mother lmao wow (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36557721) |
|
Date: September 17th, 2018 11:40 AM Author: gay autistic black woman property (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36824893) |
|
Date: March 28th, 2019 2:56 PM Author: flesh theatre (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#38005462) |
|
Date: March 28th, 2019 3:03 PM Author: mildly autistic bawdyhouse round eye jeez, wow (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#38005480) |
|
Date: September 17th, 2018 11:38 AM Author: lilac ape (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36824882) |
|
Date: October 1st, 2018 3:09 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: As I read the record, there were suggestions by some of the scientists that what -- what you admitted to Justice Kagan a little while ago, minimal work, this species could survive, albeit not robustly, but it could survive.
MR. BISHOP: No.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Wouldn't that be enough?
MR. BISHOP: No, that's just not what the administrative record shows. All right. The -
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Well, I don't want to argue the record now. |
|
Date: October 1st, 2018 3:15 PM Author: Piazza Hairy Legs jesus, that sentence is rough. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36933914) |
|
Date: October 9th, 2018 3:52 PM Author: vengeful wonderful prole sandwich (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36992193) |
|
Date: October 9th, 2018 3:55 PM Author: Avocado disturbing crotch Lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#36992211) |
|
Date: March 28th, 2019 3:18 PM Author: elite gaped abode wow (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#38005542) |
|
Date: March 28th, 2019 2:51 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car Was reading a recent transcript and Soto had a two-page long "question." LJL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#38005427) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2019 8:09 PM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: You answered --you answered discretion, but you don't answer why. Aren't we rewarding you -- rewarding you for not raising it adequately below, rewarding you for mentioning it in two sentences in your cert petition and not asking us to take it as a separate question presented? Where should we draw the line as to when we stop rewarding counsel for changing or moving the ball on cert grounds? MR. GARRE: Well, there was no strategic gamesmanship here, Justice Sotomayor. We -- the -- the broader argument, as even my friend concedes, is fairly included within the question presented. You look at page 20 of our cert petition, it was very explicitly raised -- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: You're not dealing with what I just asked, which is -- MR. GARRE: The -- the broader issue is this Court should -- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: -- you could write almost any question and throw the kitchen sink if you choose. The question is -- you didn't raise it as a separate part of your cert petition; you didn't raise it below -- why should we reward you? MR. GARRE: Okay. First of all, we did argue it in our cert petition. But -- but, as to your broader question, Justice Sotomayor, you should do just as you did in the Central Bank case in order to provide for the intelligent resolution of this question. Whether or not -- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I wasn't here. I might have taken a different position. Why -- MR. GARRE: Well, and -- and the dissenters obviously did. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Why should we reward -- MR. GARRE: And the reason is, is because this is an issue that is interdependent with the question of whether or not there could be inferred private right of action for negligence. It would be silly for this Court to say there can be inferred right for negligence, but -- but the -- but everybody would recognize, I think, that there is no -- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: That -- that's what the SE -- that's what the government says, that there is. MR. GARRE: Well, the government says there's no private right of action at all. The courts below agree with that. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: No, no, no, no, they say that the statute involves negligence. So we can find that it involves negligence and leave for another day whether there's a private cause of action or the right only belongs to the SE -- to the SEC. MR. GARRE: I think where I would take issue with that, Justice Sotomayor, is -- is the government, in the first part of the government's brief, I understand addressed the question of what would be the standard in an express action brought by the SEC. I don't really understand the government to be saying they think that in an implied private right of action, if it exists, you could have claims for negligence. They sort of artfully dodged that question and ultimately ground their brief on the broader position, which we very much agree with -- JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: They'll let us know. MR. GARRE: -- that there's simply no private right of action at all. And so I -- soI think, you know, again, to answer your question, we would take issue with the notion there was gamesmanship here. We -- we were not required to raise it at the panel stage when we were bound by the Ninth Circuit's precedent. We did flag it in our petition for rehearing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2018/18-459_5ie6.pdf |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2020 11:43 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#39641748) |
|
Date: March 11th, 2020 2:34 PM Author: Galvanic casino marketing idea https://twitter.com/AndyGrewal/status/1237806423628750848
BREAKING: Supreme Court grants stay to let Trump administration keep enforcing rule that has forced 60,000 people to wait in Mexico while seeking asylum. Only Justice Sotomayor would have denied the Trump Admin a stay. |
|
Date: March 11th, 2020 2:36 PM Author: Geriatric painfully honest main people mexico has 8 corona cases, at this point theyre better off staying there. why does Sonia want mexicans to die? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#39737759) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2020 10:04 AM Author: Selfie (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#40990016) |
|
Date: November 26th, 2020 4:52 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4698966&forum_id=2#41440326 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#41441675) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2022 7:02 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#43747609) |
|
Date: January 8th, 2022 3:51 PM Author: blue temple "millions of cases" 2022 bump (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#43751177) |
|
Date: January 17th, 2022 10:48 AM Author: Buck-toothed jap ladyboy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#43797477) |
|
Date: October 4th, 2022 3:05 PM Author: well-lubricated spot antidepressant drug Apparently KBJ giving her a run for her money with very long speeches to counsel about 14A (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#45278931) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2022 2:16 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#45415066) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2022 11:20 AM Author: Mustard hyperventilating De jure / de facto. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#45418636) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2022 12:03 PM Author: Henna cruel-hearted pisswyrm (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#45418820) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2022 1:24 PM Author: Shimmering apoplectic patrolman https://twitter.com/RogerSeverino_/status/1587132428279336967
Sotomayor just mistook de jure (legal) segregation for de facto (in fact) segregation. Alito called her out on it and she doubled down! It's an elementary mistake no competent 1st yr law student would make. |
|
Date: November 2nd, 2022 6:49 PM Author: lettuce (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#45426778) |
|
Date: May 19th, 2023 10:49 AM Author: Multi-colored amber dingle berry orchestra pit great thread (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46330700) |
|
Date: May 23rd, 2023 11:39 PM Author: Seedy hairless university mother “edit: I regret this thread. posted it during a shitty edgy conservative phase in school. she is far from the worst justice.” lmao |
|
Date: October 4th, 2023 11:34 AM Author: provocative haunted graveyard institution (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2160853&forum_id=2#46883068) |
|
Date: February 8th, 2024 1:16 PM Author: alcoholic motley stock car “Justice Sotomayor asked about if there were other ways a state might keep a candidate off the ballot.
'Are you setting up so that if some President runs for a third term, that a state can't disqualify him?' she asked, due to the 22nd Amendment's term limits on presidential tenure.
'Of course, they can disqualify him from the ballot because that is a qualification. That is categorical,' Mitchell responded.” |